logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1996. 11. 8. 선고 96누9959 판결
[자동차운전면허취소처분취소][공1996.12.15.(24),3599]
Main Issues

Whether a driver may also revoke a driver's license for a motor vehicle that can be driven with a Class I driver's license for ordinary vehicles (affirmative)

Summary of Judgment

In principle, one person's driver's license is treated separately not only in cases where he/she obtains multiple kinds of driver's license, but also in cases where he/she cancels or suspends it. However, according to Article 26 [Attachment 14] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act as well as Article 26 of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act, the driver's license of the first-class driver's license provides that the driver's license of the first-class driver's license may drive not only a passenger motor vehicle but also a motor vehicle, so the cancellation of the first-class driver's license includes the prohibition of the driver's license of the first-class driver's license. Thus, the driver's license

[Reference Provisions]

Articles 41 and 78 of the Road Traffic Act, Article 26 of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act [Attachment 14]

Reference Cases

Supreme Court en banc Decision 95Nu8850 Decided November 16, 1995 (Gong1995Ha, 3812) Supreme Court Decision 96Nu492 Decided November 25, 1994 (Gong1996Ha, 2401) Decided November 16, 1995

Plaintiff, Appellee

Plaintiff

Defendant, Appellant

The Commissioner of Incheon Metropolitan City Local Police Agency

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 96Gu5508 delivered on June 12, 1996

Text

The part of the judgment below against the defendant is reversed and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Summary of the judgment below

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below determined as follows. The plaintiff acquired Class 1 ordinary driving licenses from the Incheon market on November 6, 1979, and Class 2 driver's licenses from the Incheon market on March 29, 1973. The plaintiff, while driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol on September 5, 1995 and driving the motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol on September 03:45, 1995, he was driving the motor vehicle in front of the Incheon Bupyeong-gu 101, Seo-gu, Incheon 101, while driving the motor vehicle under the influence of the driver's license and driving the motor vehicle under the influence of the driver's license from the Seocheon-gu, Incheon 101, while driving the motor vehicle under the influence of the driver's license from the Seocheon-gu, Incheon 2nd 101, while driving the motor vehicle under the influence of the driver's license from the 15th 196th 18th 196.

2. Determination:

In principle, the driver's license is treated separately in cases where one person has obtained a number of driver's licenses as well as where one person has revoked or suspended it. However, according to Article 26 [Attachment Table 14] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act as well as Article 26 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, the driver's license of the first-class driver's license stipulates that the driver's license of the first-class driver's license is allowed to drive not only a passenger car but also a motor bicycle. Thus, the cancellation of the first-class driver's license includes the prohibition of the driver's license of the first-class driver's license. Thus, the driver's license of the first-class driver's license is related to one another. Thus, if the driver's license of the first-class driver's license of the vehicle is driven by drinking

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that the driver cannot revoke the driver's second-class driver's license on the ground of the driver's driving of the above passenger vehicle on the premise that the driver's license and the driver's license are not related to the driver's license, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the cancellation of driver's license, which affected the conclusion of the judgment

3. Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below against the defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Park Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)

arrow
심급 사건
-서울고등법원 1996.6.12.선고 96구5508
본문참조조문